AirxLiban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4518 posts, RR: 53 Posted (10 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 2294 times:
This was discussed somewhat recently in a thread titled "Branson approahces Schwarzenegger" or something to that effect...asking the governor if he would prepare LAX for the A380.
I don't know how recent this is but I was just browsing www.laxmasterplan.org and the changes they are going to be make are interesting.
Sorry if this has already been discussed recently.
Here is a quick synopsis of the reading:
1. Centre Taxiways to improve air field safety
2. More gate space to accomodate 78.9 MAP
3. Reconfiguring Bradley so that it becomes "capable of handling wide-body aircraft" by using the existing remote stands on the westend
4. Satelitte Concourse to accomodate relocated gates
5. Demolish parking structures and add terminal buildings and add more screenings, this area will be CTA Central Terminal Area, only flyaway buses and service/emergency vehicles will be able to access this area
6. West employee parking structure (new)
7. Ground Transportation centre where drop offs will be allowed. Passengers will be ushered to the CTA from this area on an "automated people mover" which will take 5 minutes.
Anyway, all this info is on www.laxmasterplan.org under the Alternatives Under Study tab -> Recommended Alternative.
Last I checked, Bradley was already capable of handling "wide-body" aircraft unless 747s, 767s, 777's and A340s are not wide body aircrafts anymore (n.b. I saw the SQ A345 at LAX this afternoon. Those engines are big)
I guess the A380 will be accomodated at those remote stands after they add gates. I wonder if they will connect these stands to the main passenger terminal.
Cali always wants to be at the forefront of everything and I guess this is the way they are doing it at LAX. It seems like it is only going to complicate matters, but I suppose in the end doing anything in the name of safety is OK.
In any event, does anyone know when this plan will be implemented? LAX will hardly be ready for the A380 by next year.
how big of a deal is this, really? Aren't airlines such as KE, VS, AF, LH? QF? SQ? all planning to operate the A380 to LAX? Things could get disastrous if they had what, 7 A380s all landing within a short time frame.
Presuming that I haven't forgotten anyone and I haven't presumed incorrectly about KE AF VS LH QF SQ...so if AF VS LH and SQ are all there at one time and QF and KE are there earlier in the morning, that is still a fair amount of passengers flooding into the terminal buildings, going through immigration, getting their bags, etc. System overflow?
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8350 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2155 times:
LAX will hardly be ready for *any* kind of growth until politicians in Los Angeles stop pandering to NIMBYs in the surrounding communities while entertaining pipe dream notions of relieving traffic at other area airports already hemmed in by development and neighborhood opposition.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
Dpr From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1992 times:
I live out in Redlands (90-minute drive east of LAX) and am of the opinion that many of these international operations would benefit greatly from a shift to Ontario (ONT), which, in my opinion, is a heavily underutilized resource. It seems that it would be a small matter to demolish it's older, unused terminal, relocate some parking lots, and build a new international terminal.
Also, ONT's ground traffic is but a small fraction of LAX's. There are not enough profanities in the English language to accurately describe the traffic in and around LAX.